Letters to the editor

Published 9:51 pm, Sunday, August 21, 2011

College football

Regarding "Football rivalries in Texas are worthy of protection" (Page B9, Thursday), Mark White is correct, the decisions that were made to dissolve the Southwest Conference in the 1990s benefited those universities that moved on to create the Big 12. But the remaining schools that were left out — University of Houston, Southern Methodist University, Texas Christian University and Rice — struggled for years and suffered irreparable damage and losses of revenue that have never been recovered.

The question is: Where was the outcry then, and where is it now? I would have a little more sympathy for White's case if those schools that left would at least play the schools left behind every once in a while.

It is interesting to note that even today Texas A&M and Texas, schools that are 100 or so miles from Houston, will not play the University of Houston. This year, both Texas and A&M play eight colleges that are not in the state of Texas. More than half of their schedule is with schools that are out of state. The same applies to Houston, but the difference is that

Houston would love to play the Texas schools; A&M has decided they would rather not. So the question I ask is: How can A&M complain about Texas having an advantage with recruiting because of the Texas Network when their actions are contrary to fair play?

All the old SWC schools are great schools. We in Texas should be proud of the education one can receive here. However, the pride White talks about is not something I feel when I talk about the football rivalries. It's hard to admire the players playing among themselves in the country club when you are on the public course and know your game is just as good.

— Don Mendel, Richmond

Astros lament

Regarding "Pence trade leaves Astros starless" (Page A1, July 30), I've been an Astros fans since the days of the Colt 45s, and I believe Astros management made a bad deal.

How can they trade away a young, proven ball player and their only All-Star for four unproven Class A and Class AA players? This does not make sense.

The Astros could have built their team around Hunter Pence and Michael Bourn, who are proven ballplayers. The Astros not only traded away Pence, they also traded away their fans. I predict the results will show up the rest of this season and next year, when the attendance will be suffering.

— Wilburn W. Neutzler, Brenham

Texas and growth

Regarding "Water needs of future have stalled since '97" (Page B1, Friday), the article assumes that growth of the population in Texas is inevitable, and that population growth is positive. No one seems to be addressing what, in my opinion, is an equally important question. What would be the benefit to Texas and its residents if we do not increase our water supply? A question that also needs to be considered is whether it would be in the overall interest of Texans to stop and rescind population growth. Population growth is not inevitable. If we put barriers in the way, such as a limited water supply, perhaps Texas will level off at a sustainable and reasonable population size.

I do recall the sustained drought of the 1950s very well. We managed, and we did not take our water supply for granted as so many seem to do today. Of course, the population in Texas would not have grown without Lyndon Johnson's plan to build reservoirs in Texas.

At the same time, I doubt that he envisioned his plan resulting in uncontrolled growth that would undermine the very essence of Texas culture.

Now Playing:

Let's examine exactly who would benefit if massive bonds for water projects are approved. Let's examine whether more population growth is really in the best interest of the next generation of Texans.